Who counts?: the politics of census-taking in contemporary America

Abstract

This article describes some of the legal decisions and problems among politicians and demographers who produce US census counts of population. The impact of the US Supreme Court hearing and decision in Wisconsin vs New York is discussed followed by an analysis of the Census Bureaus plans for the Census in 2000. Census procedures have been challenged since 1988. Litigation forced the use of the Post Enumeration Survey for adjusting the 1990 Census but the Census Director in 1991 issued a recommendation for not adjusting the 1990 counts that was affirmed by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in April 1993. Oral arguments were heard in the aforementioned New York case on January 10 1996. New York argued for the implementation of dual system estimation due to undercounting errors that were probably influenced by actions of Republican Commerce officials during the 1980s that prevented improvements in census counting. It was charged that Census Bureau methods violated the intent of Article 1 Section 2 of the Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection. Lawsuits challenged the Bureau to develop methods that would reduce the undercount of minorities and the urban poor. Other arguments of the state of Oklahoma Wisconsin the federal government for the Secretary of Commerce and New York City are summarized. The Solicitor General of the US Drew Days argued that the true total population of the US was unknown and unknowable and that the Secretary of Commerce had the authority to make decisions about the census. The main issue before the court became who had the authority to decide not to adjust. All of the US Supreme Court judges voted on March 20 1996 in favor of unadjusted census counts. The issue of statistical adjustment methods as a violation of the Constitution was not decided. Plans for the census of 2000 include reducing costs and increasing accuracy through a three-stage count strategy.